Citation Nr: 22036612 Decision Date: 06/24/22 Archive Date: 06/24/22 DOCKET NO. 14-23 429 DATE: June 24, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active air service from August 1960 to October 1982. He died in September 2008. The appellant is his surviving spouse. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2012 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This case was previously remanded by the Board in September 2018 for additional development. It has since been returned to the Board for further appellate action. The Board finds that the development conducted does not comply with the September 2018 Board remand directives. In this regard, the RO obtained VA medical opinions in November 2020 and March 2022. The examiner opined that it was less as likely as not that the veteran's cause of death (ventricular dysrhythmia and acute myocardial infarction) was caused by or otherwise related to his service, to specifically include his in-service mitral systolic murmur. In support of this opinion, the examiner stated that there was no history of any problems with arrhythmia noted in the Veteran's service records. Additionally, the examiner found no evidence for heart disease or any service-connected heart disabilities prior to the Veteran's death. The examiner acknowledged an August 2018 brief submitted by the Veteran and stated that it was not related in this case. The examiner stated that there was no medical evidence or support in the August 2018 brief to connect the Veteran's heart murmur to his cause of death. The examiner added that the Veteran had an innocent grade II mitral systolic murmur with no noted abnormalities or progressions. The examiner found no evidence to suggest that the Veteran's longstanding history of innocent grade 2 mitral systolic murmur progressed to cardiac disease or ischemia, including myocardial infarction. The Board finds that the VA examiner did not discuss the medical literature referenced in the August 2018 appellate brief. The Board notes that compliance with a remand is not discretionary, and failure to comply with the terms of a remand necessitates remand for corrective action. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Therefore, an addendum VA medical opinion is warranted. Furthermore, the Board takes judicial notice that the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) showed that he underwent follow-up electrocardiograms and a coronary artery risk evaluation during his active service. Upon remand, those STR records should be addressed. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Identify and obtain any pertinent, outstanding VA and private treatment records and associate them with the claims file. 2. Then, return the claims file to the VA Medical Center for an addendum opinion. The claims file must be made available to and reviewed by an examiner with sufficient expertise to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's cause of death. Based on a review of the record, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (approximately 50 percent or better probability) that the Veteran's cause of death is related to his active service. The examiner should specifically discuss the two articles referenced in the August 2018 appellate brief and the follow-up electrocardiograms and a coronary artery risk evaluation documented in the Veteran's STRs. The rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided. 3. Confirm that the VA medical opinions provided comport with this remand and undertake any other development determined to be warranted. 4. Then, readjudicate the appeal. If the decision remains adverse to the Appellant, issue a supplemental statement of the case and allow the appropriate time for response. Then, return the case to the Board. Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Ware, Counsel The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.